Haggarty v Scottish Transport and General Workers Union
| Jurisdiction | Scotland |
| Judgment Date | 02 December 1954 |
| Docket Number | No. 11. |
| Date | 02 December 1954 |
| Court | Court of Session (Inner House - First Division) |
1ST DIVISION.
RepetitionCondictio indebitiCondictio causa data causa non secutaTrade UnionUltra vires admission of temporary memberWhether such member entitled to repayment of entry fee and weekly contributionsWhether question determinable without proofContractProcessVoluntary Association.
In an action against a trade union for repayment of an entry fee and certain weekly contributions the pursuer averred that he had made the payments to the union, in accordance with its rules, under the mistaken impression that he was a member of the union; that in July 1940 the union had purported to admit him to temporary membership for the duration of the war; that in so doing the union had acted ultra vires; and that in fact he had never been a member of the union. The defenders, while admitting that they had acted ultra vires,pleaded that the action was irrelevant, and averred, inter alia, that during the period of his purported temporary membership the pursuer had enjoyed all the rights and advantages of a member. The Sheriff-substitute having without proof repelled the defences and granted decree, on the view that the pursuer was entitled to the benefit of the condictio indebiti and also the condictio causa data causa non secuta,
Held, on appeal, that the pursuer's appropriate remedy was thecondictio indebiti, and that, this being an equitable remedy, the Sheriff-substitute should have heard evidence in order to put himself in a position to judge whether or not the retention of the money by the defenders would be inequitable; and the case remittedfor proof.
(Sequel to Martin v. Scottish Transport and General Workers UnionSC, 1952 S. C. (H. L.) 1.)
Peter Haggarty brought a small debt action against the Scottish Transport and General Workers Union, in the Sheriff Court at Glasgow, for payment to him of 15, 8s., being the entry fee paid on his purported admission to temporary membership of the defenders' union in July 1940 and weekly subscriptions to the union from then until July 1948, when the defenders purported to terminate his membership. During that period the pursuer worked as a docker at Glasgow Docks.
The action was later transferred to the Ordinary Court Roll on the defenders' motion, and a record was made up.
The parties averred, inter alia:(Cond. 3) "In or about July 1940 the pursuer received a letter from the then secretary of the executive council of the defenders' union purporting to invite him to join the union. The pursuer on 27th July 1940 called on defenders and was asked to sign what appeared to be an application form for membership of the defenders' union and which, inter alia, contained a condition that the executive of the union should have the right to require him to forfeit his membership at any time after the signing of an armistice. The defenders had no power under their rules to admit members on a temporary basis. The pursuer, who had no knowledge of the defenders' rules, was induced to sign the said form by representations made to him by the defenders' officials to the effect that he would thereby become a member of the defenders' union. In any event the pursuer erroneously believed that by signing the said form he would be admitted a member of the defenders' union, and that he was subsequently so admitted. The pursuer thereupon paid to the defenders an entry fee of 2, 10s. With reference to the defenders' averments in answer, believed to be true that the defenders entered into an agreement with various other parties whereby they undertook to accept temporary war-time members. Quoad ultra the defenders' averments in answer are denied so far as not coinciding herewith. Explained that the defenders, although they knew or ought to have known that they had no power under their existing rules to admit temporary war-time members, took no steps to amend their rules and did not carry out the said...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Morgan Guaranty Trust Company v Lothian Regional Council
...v Lord AdvocateSC 1959 SC 203 Grant v Grant's Executors 1994 SLT 163 Haggerty v Scottish Transport and General Workers' UnionSC 1955 SC 109 Hazell v Hammersmith and Fulham London Borough CouncilELR[1990] 2 QB 697; [1992] 2 AC1 Hydro Electric Commission of the Township of Nepean v Ontario Hy......
-
Yarona Healthcare Network (Pty) Ltd v Medshield Medical Scheme
...Revenue and Another 1992 (4) SA 202 (A): applied. F Scotland Haggarty v Scottish Transport and General Workers Union [1954] ScotCS CSIH 6 (1955 SC 109): referred Case Information MC Maritz SC (with DR van Zyl) for the appellant. D Berger SC (with K Millard) for the respondent. G An appeal f......
-
Yarona Healthcare Network (Pty) Ltd v Medshield Medical Scheme
...unjust enrichment within the meaning of the law (793B). [44] Haggarty v Scottish Transport and General Workers Union [1954] ScotCS CSIH 6 (1955 SC 109). [45] As to which, see Visser op cit (above n29) at 102 – 6 and 498 – 501; Du Plessis op cit (above n29) at 387 – [46] Gericke v Sack 1978 ......
-
Connelly v Simpson
...had no right to elect between his contractual remedies and the condictio:Haggarty v. Scottish Transport and General Workers UnionSC 1955 S.C. 109, which dealt with the condictio indebiti, but the same considerations applied to all comparable equitable remedies, of which the condictio causa ......